Page No.# 1/12 GAHC020004452019 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/176/2019 TOSHELI W/O SHRI. TOKIHO WOTSA, R/O MISHILIMI VILLAGE, PUGHOBOTO SUB-DIVISION, P.O/P.S - PUGHOBOTO, ZUNHEBOTO, N/L VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER, N/L, KOHIMA 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ZUNHEBOTO N/L 3:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN SUB-DIVISIONAL LEVEL RECRUITMENT BOARD PUGHOBOTO ZUNHEBOTO N/L 4:KHUTOLI SHEQI SWEEPER O/O THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER PUGHOBOTO ZUNHEBOTO N/ Advocate for the Petitioner : LIMAWAPANG, AREPLA CHANG,TOSHIKA Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, Page No.# 2/12 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 20.05.2026 Heard Mr. Limawapang, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. I Imsong, Learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Ms. Rovimeno Thou, Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4. 2. The Petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, has presented a challenge to the selection and appointment of the Respondent No. 4, against the post of Sweeper, in the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, District- Zunheboto, on the ground that the Respondent No. 4 was not an indigenous inhabitant of the district, in question. 3. The facts in brief, requisite for adjudication of the issue, arising in the present Writ Petition, is noticed as under : 3.1. The Commissioner, Kohima, Nagaland, had issued an advertisement dated 17.01.2018, inviting applications for filing up of various Grade-III, as well as, Grade-IV posts, available in different district establishments, including a Grade-IV post, available in the Office of the Deputy Page No.# 3/12 Commissioner, Zunheboto, Nagaland. 3.2. In terms of the eligibility criterias set out in the said advertisement, an applicant should be an indigenous inhabitant of the district. 3.3. The petitioner, in pursuance to the said advertisement, submitted her application for recruitment against the Grade-IV post, available in the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto. The Respondent No. 4 had also submitted her application against the said post. Thereafter, a selection was held in the matter and a select list came to be published on 28.02.2019. In the select list, so published, the Respondent No. 4 was placed at Sl. No. 1 while the petitioner was so placed at Sl. No. 2, on merits. 3.4. In terms of the selection of the Respondent No. 4, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, Nagaland, proceeded to appoint the Petitioner as a Sweeper in his establishment. The Petitioner, being aggrieved by the appointment of the Respondent No. 4, submitted a representation dated 13.08.2019, before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto and therein, required the cancellation of the selection and appointment of the Petitioner, on the ground that the Respondent No. 4, was not an indigenous inhabitant of the district, in question. The said Page No.# 4/12 prayer of the Petitioner, not being considered, the Petitioner had approached this Court, by way of institution of a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 138/2019. However, in view of the fact that in the said Writ Petition, the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate, obtained by the Respondent No. 4, was not challenged, the Petitioner prayed for withdrawal of the said Writ Petition with liberty to re-file the same. This Court, vide order dated 19.09.2019, permitted the Writ Petitioner to withdraw the said Writ Petition, with liberty to re-file the same. 3.5. It is projected that one Khakuto Sheqi, had also approached this Court, by way of instituting a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 125/2019, assailing the selection and appointment of the Respondent No. 4, herein. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 16.08.2019, had, while issuing notice in the matter, suspended the order dated 18.01.2019, issued towards appointment of the Respondent No. 4, against the post of Sweeper, in the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto. 3.6. After the present Writ Petition was so instituted and notices issued, therein, the Respondent authorities issued an order dated 10.12.2019 to the Respondent No. 4, herein, requiring her to establish that she was a person belonging to the Scheduled Tribe and was an indigenous inhabitant of Page No.# 5/12 Nagaland. Thereafter, vide an order dated 10.12.2019, issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate, issued to the Respondent No. 4, came to be cancelled. Being aggrieved, the Respondent No. 4 approached this Court by way of instituting a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 194/2020. 3.7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, while issuing notice in the said Writ Petition, was pleased to stay the effect and operation and the orders impugned, therein. The petitioner, herein, had also instituted the present Writ Petition. Accordingly, the said Writ Petitions being WP(C) No. 176/2019, instituted by the Petitioner, herein, and WP(C) No. 194/2020, instituted by the Respondent No. 4, were taken up for final consideration analogously. On such consideration being made, the Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide judgment and order dated 04.03.2022, was pleased to dismiss the present Writ Petition, preferred by the Petitioner, herein, i.e. WP(C) No. 176/2019, while proceeding to allow the Writ Petition, being WP(C) No. 194/2020, instituted by the Respondent No. 4, herein. 3.8. After disposal of the said Writ Petition, the Coordinate Bench of this Court directed the Respondent authorities to enquire and verify, with regard to the Page No.# 6/12 indigenous inhabitant status of the Respondent No. 4. 3.9. The Petitioner, herein, being aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 04.03.2022, assailed the same by way of instituting a Writ Appeal being W.A No. 03/2022, before the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench of this Court, upon considering the issues arising in the present Writ Petition, was pleased, vide judgment and order dated 20.11.2025, to interfere with the judgment and order dated 04.03.2022, passed by the Ld. Single Judge, in WP(C) No. 176/2019, and remanded back the matter for a fresh consideration. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition came to be restored to its file and listed before this Court for consideration. 3.10. A further factor would be required to be noticed by this Court, is that the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, in pursuance to the enquiry carried out by him in the matter, had, vide notification dated 25.04.2023, held the Respondent No. 4, to be not an indigenous inhabitant of Nagaland and the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate dated 14.06.2013, was cancelled. 3.11. The Respondent No. 4, being aggrieved, had assailed the cancellation of the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate, issued to her, by way of instituting a Writ Petition Page No.# 7/12 being WP(C) No. 296/2023. The Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 296/2023, which was being considered along with the present Writ Petition, was, however, on the prayer of the Respondent No. 4, permitted to be withdrawn by this Court, vide order dated 14.05.2026. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that on the withdrawal of the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent No. 4, i.e. WP(C) No. 296/2023, the cancellation of the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate, so effected, vide the order dated 25.04.2023, issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, stands revived. He submits that the Respondent No. 4, accordingly, cannot be held to be an eligible candidate, for recruitment, against the Grade-IV post, as advertised, vide the advertisement dated 17.01.2018. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the name of the Respondent No. 4, would now be required to be deleted from the select list, published in the matter and on such deletion, it would be the Petitioner, herein, who would be placed at Sl. No. 1, on merits. Accordingly, it is prayed that the Respondent authorities be directed to appoint the Petitioner, in terms of a merit position obtained in the selection process. 5. Mr. I Imsong, Learned Additional Advocate General has not disputed the facts noticed, hereinabove, but has made a Page No.# 8/12 submission to the effect that the select list, published earlier, had a validity of only 6 (Six) months and on the lapse of 6 (Six) months, since the date of publication of the select list, the same having lost its validity, the same cannot now be directed to be implemented. He submits that the post in question, would now be required to be filed up by instituting a fresh selection process. 6. Ms. Rovimeno, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 4, has fairly submitted that the Writ Petition, being WP(C) No. 296/2023, having been withdrawn by the Respondent No. 4, and the same having revived the cancellation of her Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate, she would not be, any further, eligible for consideration of her case for appointment against the post in question. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. As noticed, hereinabove, in pursuance to the judgment and order dated 04.03.2022, passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 176/2019 and WP(C) No. 194/2020, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, had proceeded to carry out a verification process, to ascertain the indigenous inhabitant status of the Respondent No. 4. On conclusion of the said verification process, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, vide notification dated Page No.# 9/12 25.04.2023, proceeded to hold that the Respondent No. 4, cannot be considered to be an indigenous inhabitant of Nagaland and accordingly, the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate, issued to the Petitioner, came to be cancelled. 8. The Respondent No. 4 had assailed the said cancellation, by way of instituting a Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 296/2023. However, as noticed hereinabove, the said Writ Petition was withdrawn by the Respondent No. 4, herein. Accordingly, for all intent and purpose, the Respondent No. 4, cannot be held to be an indigenous inhabitant. 9. Having noticed the said position, this Court would refer to the advertisement dated 17.08.2018, to understand the requisite eligibility criterias for being eligible to apply against the post, advertised in this advertisement, therein. The eligibility criterias, as set out in the said advertisement for Grade-IV, being relevant, is extracted, hereinbelow : “4. For Grade-IV: a. Should be an indigenous inhabitant of the District. b. Land ownership claims as per Standing Government order, c. Minimum age 18 years and maximum age-35 years, as on 19/02/2019. 5. Age relaxation for regular Govt. employees shall be allowed subject to a maximum of 5 (Five) Years. 6. For Candidates who are Government Employees and still serving are required to submit "No Objection Certificate" duly signed by the Head of the Department with name and Office Seal along with date of appointment.” 10. A perusal of the said eligibility criterias would go to reveal Page No.# 10/12 that an applicant, desirous for applying against a Grade-IV post, must be an indigenous inhabitant of the district concerned, wherein, the post, against which such application is proposed, to be submitted, was available. The Petitioner, as well as, the Respondent No. 4, in pursuance to the application submitted by them, had appeared in the selection process and in the select list, as published, the name of the Respondent No. 4, was placed at Sl. No. 1, while the name of the Petitioner was placed at Sl. No. 2, basing on the merit positions obtained by them in the selection process. However, with the cancellation of the Indigenous Inhabitant Certificate granted to the Respondent No. 4, she is to be held to be not eligible for even being considered against the post in question, accordingly, the placement of the Respondent No. 4, in the select list at Sl. No. 1, would mandate an interference. 11. Accordingly, the placement of Respondent No. 4 at Sl. No. 1, stands set aside. With the setting aside of the name of the Respondent No. 4 from the select list, in question, it would now be the Petitioner, herein, who would be so placed at Sl. No. 1, in the select list. Accordingly, now the select list being required to be so construed, with the Petitioner being placed, therein, at Sl. No. 1, this Court would consider the submissions made by Mr. I Imsong, Learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for the State Respondents that the select Page No.# 11/12 list, originally prepared, had a validity of only 6 (Six) months and after lapse of 6 (Six) months, the select list cannot be held to be subsisting. 12. This Court notices that although the said select list was so prepared and may have had a validity of 6 (Six) months, the same was under challenge before this Court, proximate to the time, the same was so published. The said select list being sub-judiced before this Court, proximate to the time, it was so published, this Court holds that the said select list cannot be held to have lost its validity and the said select list continued to remain in force, during the pendency of the earlier proceedings, as well as the present Writ Petition. 13. In view of the above discussion, the select list having been found to be subsisting, this Court further holds that with the deletion of the name of the Respondent No. 4, therefrom, it is the Petitioner, who would now be placed at Sl. No. 1 of the said select list. Consequently, the Petitioner would now be required to be appointed against the Grade-IV post, as advertised, vide the advertisement dated 17.01.2018, available in the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, Nagaland. 14. Accordingly, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, Nagaland, as well as the other Respondents, herein, are directed to process the case of the Petitioner and issue to her Page No.# 12/12 orders, appointing her against the post of Sweeper, available in the establishment of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Pughoboto, Nagaland, within a period of 1 (One) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 15. With the above observations and directions, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant